Use of a pressure-sensing walkway system for biometric assessment of gait characteristics in goats

Autoři: Rebecca E. Rifkin aff001;  Remigiusz M. Grzeskowiak aff001;  Pierre-Yves Mulon aff001;  H. Steve Adair aff001;  Alexandru S. Biris aff002;  Madhu Dhar aff001;  David E. Anderson aff001
Působiště autorů: Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, University of Tennessee College of Veterinary Medicine, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States of America aff001;  Center for Integrative Nanotechnology Sciences, University of Arkansas at Little Rock, Little Rock, Arkansas, United States of America aff002
Vyšlo v časopise: PLoS ONE 14(10)
Kategorie: Research Article
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223771


The purpose of this study was to quantitatively assess gait characteristics and weight-bearing forces during ambulation in goats free of lameness using a pressure-sensing walkway as a biometric tool for stride, gait, and force analysis. Forty-six non-lame adult goats ranging in age from 5 to 6 years, mixed-breeds, and with a mean body weight of 52 ± 7.1 kgs were used. Goats were trained to walk over a pressure-sensing walkway. Data for analysis was collected on 2 different days, 3 days apart. On each day, 2 to 5 walking passes, in the same direction, were captured for each goat. Data from 2 valid passes meeting the criteria for consistent walking gait on each day were averaged then used for analysis. Analysis was performed, including the day-effect, for stride, gait, and force characteristics. Of the 46 goats enrolled in the study, complete data sets were achieved in 33 (72%) goats. Gait biometrics were similar among the assessment days; therefore, all data was pooled for the purpose of characterizing data for individual limb and biometric parameter comparisons at the individual goat level. Statistical analysis revealed that no difference within the paired limbs, and that there were significant differences between the front limbs and hind limbs. Maximum force and maximum peak pressure were significantly greater for the front limbs as compared with the hind limbs (p < 0.001). Based on the results, gait and force characteristics can be consistently measured in goats using a pressure-sensing walkway during a consistent walking gait. Goats apply greater force to the forelimbs during the weight-bearing phase of stride as compared with the hind limbs. The use of objective assessment tools is expected to improve the ability of researchers and clinicians to monitor changes in weight bearing and gait and will contribute to improved animal welfare.

Klíčová slova:

Biometrics – Body limbs – Body weight – Data acquisition – Gait analysis – Goats – Sensory systems – Walking


1. Harvey EJ, Giannoudis PV, Martineau PA, Lansdowne JL, Dimitriou R, Moriarty TF, et al. Preclinical animal models in trauma research. J Orthop Trauma. 2011;25(8):488–493. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e3182251421 21738062

2. Reichert JC, Saifzadeh S, Wullschleger ME, Epari DR, Schütz MA, Duda GN, et al. The challenge of establishing preclinical models for segmental bone defect research. Biomaterials. 2009;30(12):2149–2163. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2008.12.050 19211141

3. Pearce AI, Richards RG, Milz S, Schneider E, Pearce SG. Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater. 2007;13(1):1–10.

4. Fulton LK, Clarke MS, Farris HE Jr. The goat as a model for biomedical research and teaching. Ilar J. 1994;1;36(2):21–29.

5. Muri K, Stubsjøen SM, Valle PS. Development and testing of an on-farm welfare assessment protocol for dairy goats. Anim Welfare. 2013;22(3):385–400.

6. Browning R Jr, Leite-Browning ML, Byars M Jr. Reproductive and health traits among Boer, Kiko, and Spanish meat goat does under humid, subtropical pasture conditions of the southeastern United States. J Anim Sci. 2011;89(3):648–660. doi: 10.2527/jas.2010-2930 21036938

7. Deeming LE, Beausoleil NJ, Stafford KJ, Webster JR, Zobel G. The development of a reliable 5-point gait scoring system for use in dairy goats. J Dairy Sci. 2018;101(5):4491–4497. doi: 10.3168/jds.2017-13950 29477516

8. Gigliuto C, De Gregori M, Malafoglia V, Raffaeli W, Compagnone C, Visai L, et al. Pain assessment in animal models: do we need further studies?. J Pain Res. 2014;7:227–236. doi: 10.2147/JPR.S59161 24855386

9. Hill NP, Murphy PE, Nelson AJ, Mouttotou N, Green LE, Morgan KL. Lameness and foot lesions in adult British dairy goats. Vet Rec. 1997;141(16):412–416. doi: 10.1136/vr.141.16.412 9364713

10. Olechnowicz J, Jaśkowski JM. Lameness in small ruminants. Med Weter. 2011;67(11):715–719.

11. Vieira A, Oliveira MD, Nunes T, Stilwell G. Making the case for developing alternative lameness scoring systems for dairy goats. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2015;171:94–100.

12. Anzuino K, Bell NJ, Bazeley KJ, Nicol CJ. Assessment of welfare on 24 commercial UK dairy goat farms based on direct observations. Vet Rec. 2010;167(20):774–780. doi: 10.1136/vr.c5892 21262609

13. Flower FC, Sanderson DJ, Weary DM. Hoof pathologies influence kinematic measures of dairy cow gait. J Dairy Sci. 2005;88(9):3166–3173. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(05)73000-9 16107407

14. Flower FC, Weary DM. Gait assessment in dairy cattle. Animal. 2009;3(1):87–95. doi: 10.1017/S1751731108003194 22444175

15. Keegan KG, Kramer J, Yonezawa Y, Maki H, Pai PF, Dent EV, et al. Assessment of repeatability of a wireless, inertial sensor–based lameness evaluation system for horses. Am J Vet Res. 2011;72(9):1156–1163. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.72.9.1156 21879972

16. Van Nuffel A, Zwertvaegher I, Van Weyenberg S, Pastell M, Thorup V, Bahr C, et al. Lameness Detection in Dairy Cows: Part 2. Use of Sensors to Automatically Register Changes in Locomotion or Behavior. Animals. 2015;5(3):861–885. doi: 10.3390/ani5030388 26479390

17. Kim J, Breur GJ. Temporospatial and kinetic characteristics of sheep walking on a pressure sensing walkway. Can J Vet Res. 2008;72(1):50–55. 18214162

18. Oosterlinck M, Pille F, Sonneveld DC, Oomen AM, Gasthuys F, Back W. Contribution of dynamic calibration to the measurement accuracy of a pressure plate system throughout the stance phase in sound horses. Vet J. 2012;193(2):471–474. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2012.01.029 22386612

19. D'Andrea L, Guccione J, Alsaaod M, Deiss R, Di Loria A, Steiner A, et al. Validation of a pedometer algorithm as a tool for evaluation of locomotor behaviour in dairy Mediterranean buffalo. J Dairy Res. 2017;84(4):391–394. doi: 10.1017/S0022029917000668 29154738

20. Black LL, Gaynor J, Gahring D, Adams C, Aron D, Harman S, et al. Effect of adipose-derived mesenchymal stem and regenerative cells on lameness in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis of the coxofemoral joints: a randomized, double-blinded, multicenter controlled trial. Vet Ther. 2007;8(4):272–284. 18183546

21. Hill RJ, Mason HM, Yeip G, Merchant SS, Olsen AL, Stott RD, et al. The Influence of Oblique Angle Forced Exercise in Surgically Destabilized Stifle Joints Is Synergistic with Bone, but Antagonistic with Cartilage in an Ovine Model of Osteoarthritis. Arthritis. 2017;2017:7481619. doi: 10.1155/2017/7481619 28348888

22. Easley J, Puttlitz CM, Seim 3rd H, Ramo N, Abjornson C, Cammisa FP Jr, et al. Biomechanical and histologic assessment of a novel screw retention technology in an ovine lumbar fusion model. Spine J. 2018;18(12):2302–2315. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.07.021 30075298

23. Meijer E, Bertholle CP, Oosterlinck M, van der Staay FJ, Back W, van Nes A. Pressure mat analysis of the longitudinal development of pig locomotion in growing pigs after weaning. BMC Vet Res. 2014;10(1):37. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-10-37 24502522

24. Meijer E, Oosterlinck M, van Nes A, Back W, van der Staay FJ. Pressure mat analysis of naturally occurring lameness in young pigs after weaning. BMC Vet Res. 2014 Dec;10(1):193. doi: 10.1186/s12917-014-0193-8 25139245

25. Zammit GV, Menz HB, Munteanu SE. Reliability of the TekScan MatScan® system for the measurement of plantar forces and pressures during barefoot level walking in healthy adults. J Foot Ankle Res. 2010;3(1):11. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-3-11 20565812

26. Wheeler CA, White BJ, Anderson DE, Amrine DE, Larson RL. Assessment of biometric tools for quantitative gait analysis in Holstein calves. Am J Vet Res. 2013;74(11):1443–1449. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.74.11.1443 24168311

27. Kremer JA, Robison CI, Karcher DM. Growth Dependent Changes in Pressure Sensing Walkway Data for Turkeys. Front Vet Sci. 2018;5:241. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00241 30356777

28. Kim J, Kazmierczak KA, Breur GJ. Comparison of temporospatial and kinetic variables of walking in small and large dogs on a pressure-sensing walkway. Am J Vet Res. 2011;72(9):1171–1177. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.72.9.1171 21879974

29. Light VA, Steiss JE, Montgomery RD, Rumph PF, Wright JC. Temporal-spatial gait analysis by use of a portable walkway system in healthy Labrador Retrievers at a walk. Am J Vet Res. 2010;71(9):997–1002. doi: 10.2460/ajvr.71.9.997 20807137

30. Verdugo MR, Rahal SC, Agostinho FS, Govoni VM, Mamprim MJ, Monteiro FO. Kinetic and temporospatial parameters in male and female cats walking over a pressure sensing walkway. BMC Vet Res. 2013;9(1):129. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-9-129 23803220

31. Agostinho FS, Rahal SC, Araújo FA, Conceição RT, Hussni CA, El-Warrak AO, et al. Gait analysis in clinically healthy sheep from three different age groups using a pressure-sensitive walkway. BMC Vet Res. 2012;8(1):87. doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-8-87 22726641

32. Lequang T, Maitre P, Roger T, Viguier E. Is a pressure walkway system able to highlight a lameness in dog?. In6th World Congress of Biomechanics (WCB 2010). August 1–6, 2010 Singapore 2010 (pp. 190–193). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

33. Fahie M, Cortez J, Ledesma M, Su Y. Pressure mat analysis of walk and trot gait characteristics in 66 normal small, medium, large and giant breed dogs. Front Vet Sci. 2018;5:256. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2018.00256 30386786

34. Whittle MS. Gait analysis: an introduction. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2007. pp. 47–193.

35. Martini L, Lorenzini RN, Cinotti S, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Giardino R. Evaluation of pain and stress levels of animals used in experimental research. J Surg Res. 2000;88(2):114–119. doi: 10.1006/jsre.1999.5789 10644475

36. Agostinho FS, Rahal SC, Geraldo B, Justolin PL, Teixeira CR, Lins FL, et al. Influence of calibration protocols for a pressure-sensing walkway on kinetic and temporospatial parameters. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol. 2015;28(1):25–29. doi: 10.3415/VCOT-14-05-0081 25450155

37. Aranzulla PJ, Muckle DS, Cunningham JL. A portable monitoring system for measuring weight-bearing during tibial fracture healing. Med Eng Phys. 1998;20(7):543–548. 9832030

38. Fitzpatrick J, Scott M, Nolan A. Assessment of pain and welfare in sheep. Small Ruminant Res. 2006;62:55–61. doi: 10.1016/j.smallrumres.2005.07.028

39. Stasiak KL, Maul DO, French E, Hellyer PW, Vandewoude S. Species-specific assessment of pain in laboratory animals. Contemp Top Lab Anim Sci. 2003;42(4):13–20. 12906396

40. Martini L, Fini M, Giavaresi G, Giardino R. Sheep model in orthopedic research: a literature review. Compar Med. 2001;51(4):292–299.

41. Keegan KG, Dent EV, Wilson DA, Janicek J, Kramer J, Lacarrubba A, et al. Repeatability of subjective evaluation of lameness in horses. Equine Vet J. 2010;42(2):92–97. doi: 10.2746/042516409X479568 20156242

42. Barendregt JJ, Veerman JL. Categorical versus continuous risk factors and the calculation of potential impact fractions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010;64(3):209–212. doi: 10.1136/jech.2009.090274 19692711

43. Jaeger TF. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. J Mem Lang. 2008;59(4):434–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 19884961

44. Sah RL, Ratcliffe A. Translational models for musculoskeletal tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2010;16(1):1–3. doi: 10.1089/ten.TEB.2009.0726 19905871

45. Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals Great Britain 2017: Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 21(7) and 21A(1) of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. National Statistics. 2018. Available from:

Článek vyšel v časopise


2019 Číslo 10